accident report

Page 8 of 10  

Simply because he is dealing with an insurance company is a good enough reason to hire an attorney.

If the guy hit Nate's truck, unless Nate's wife ran a red light, the other driver clearly was proceeding when he couldn't see anything. Thats careless driving on some level.

Bullshit. In PA, someone gets a summons, if not both drivers.

Rubbish. A proper body shop will repair with as little filler as possible.

More crap. One, you don't know the damage, two, it may well be that the policy Nate bought requires replacement.

That wasn't his point.

Simply put, the attorney works for the person/company paying the fee. Thus, Nate should have an attorney of his own, not just one that the insurance company pays for.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That sounds like paranoia to me and will put the insurance company on the defensive for no valid reason.

LOL, you are kidding, right?!?!?!

Probably becaue the towns in PA are so poor, that they need any possible source of income, including bogus traffic tickets.

Considering the pillar is a primary component of the structural integrity of the cab and actually appears to have significant damage, it will probably need to be replaced regardless of the policy he has and his policy really doesn't matter unless he intends to make a claim against he own insurance.

While you are correct, I doubt that he will really need one or that one would do him any good.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope. If you don't have full control of the vehicle, its careless driving.

Nope, its more like, the cops would get sued if they didn't accurately report the events and issue citations according to the law. Other than that, I tend to agree, small town cops are a PITA.

But the truck isn't wrecked? Wow.... I guess it depends on what *you* want to think whether or not its wrecked. I'm betting there is a cab mount real close to that spot, any guesses as to the damge it took?

Paranoid or not, when dealing with an insurance company (face it, they charge you big dollars to make sure you don't have to spend big dollars) that wants to keep its money, and another party that wants to spend as little as possible... yeah, its a good idea to have a lawyer.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

heh......yup. hiring the devil to fight demons. :-)
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am glad to hear that your family is uninjured. Count your blessings there. BTW, keep my name out of it :-)

The truck is far from wrecked and in all honesty, how many people really use car fax anyway. Unless you plan on dumping it in the next few years, the possible devaluation from carfax would be minimal to non-existant.

What exactly is the officer going to give him a ticket for? At best, he could have given him a ticket for failure to yield right of way but in order to do that, he would have to believe that the truck driver saw your wife and pulled out anyway and we both know that didn't happen and the conditions at hand (as described by you) makes what he said believable. It was an accident, simple as that.

It is not up to the police to determine who is at fault. That is up to the insurance companies and if necessary, the legal system. The duty of the police is to report the facts involved in the accident and issue citations for any laws that were broken which may have lead to the collision. Despite the no-fault garbage that some states like to tout, the fault is usually attributed to the one who hit the other unless the one hit was cited for a moving violation that could influence the situation such as speeding, failure to yield right of way, careless driving.... It is obvious that your wife is the one that was hit and since she was not cited for any moving violations, the fault is clearly on the one who hit her and you will have no problem collecting from his insurance. They know that if they fight it, that they will lose and that would cost them much more money and money is the game with insurance.

I am surprised to hear you say this. Unless you think that the cab was forged out of a single piece of metal, it most certainly can be replaced and you as a professional welder should know this. While true that it does not unbolt, it can be cut away and a new one welded into place, just like the original one was. As you can see, this is a structural component of the cab and the amount of damage to it makes it appear to be irreparable so filler will not be an issue except possibly where the new one is welded in. As for the bank or lending institution, it is not their concern what happens to the vehicle, only that they get the money that they lent you along with the interest that you agreed to.

I hope that your initial consultation is free or you can expect a bill. All he or his insurance is responsible for is the repairs to your vehicle. When you are on the road, you by default assume some risk and you should be grateful that your wife and family was not injured and to look to make sure that the truck is repaired properly. There is little that an attorney can do for you here other than cost you money.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

what?
the police officer only has to prove that the driver did not yield to the other driver. intent has nothing to do with it. the law requires that a driver yield to all vehicles that are close enough to be a hazzard. that would appear to be the case here since he hit the other car.
traffic infractions are called malem prohibitum (my latin isn't great). that means they are wrong because the State says they are. no intent required. ignorance is no excuse.
criminal laws are malem in se (again, my latin really sucks) which means they are wrong in themselves and some degree of intent is required to violate those.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't get how anyone figures that damage is "far from wrecked". Thats about $3-5000 in damage, depending on how the paint shop goes about matching the paint.
And yes, carfax is a fairly popular source on cars, I see requests for them online, and printouts from them on used car lots.

Ok, so in one paragraph, you go from the cops having no determination in placing fault, to having all the determination in finding fault.
As usual, you are spinning before even getting a reply.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

One side of the truck is messed up but it appears that the doors still work and the truck is still drivable and fully usable. Hell, there wasn't even any glass broken. While it may look like crap right now, it actually requires no repairs to be operational and cannot be considered wrecked.

Like I said, how many potential buyers really use it and the damage here is not serious, ugly, but not serious. Unless he plans on trading it in the next year or so, or sell it privately for top dollar, he should have no problem.

LOL, you do make me laugh. They report the facts, nothing more. Those facts also include any traffic violations that the drivers may have done that may or may not influence the outcome but it is not their responsibility to be judge and jury. I have said nothing different despite you twisted Maxland spin.

PKB
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

many thanks!

i gotta disagree there. its definately wrecked.

every dealership where you go to trade in your truck. when im shopping for used vehicles (bought 3 in the last year alone!) i always use carfax. when a carfax shoes an accident, i always and without exception move on to another vehicle, without regard to any of the details involved.

in 2000 i bought a new jeep wrangler. in 2001 i bought an expedition. in 2002 i bought a new mustang gt. in 2003 i bought 2 new jeep wranglers. in 2004 i bought a used f350, a used dodge 2500, and a new dodge ram (the one that got wrecked). so far in 2005 ive bought a new jeep wrangler, and an '05 bighorn dually diesel. as clearly demonstrated in my vehicle history, i buy a new vehicle more often than many people buy new shoes. yes, this truck in question will also be dumped soon.

for hitting my truck. in fact, the officer in question should have also pistol whipped him. :-)

but to replace it will require a frankenstein job and i know how that shit goes. over time the paint peels, shit starts to creek and moan, etc.
--
Nathan W. Collier
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not by definition. While I will agree that it does look like hell and need some serious body work to look new again, it appears to need no repairs at all to be fully functional. I bet that back door still works as well.

I guess that money just burns a hole in your pocket, huh :-) The problem is that most insurance companies will not pay you for depreciation because the resale value is not their concern. They are only obligated to return the vehicle to pre-accident conditions.

LOL, the problem is that I doubt that he knew the specific summons code for hitting Nate's truck. Like others have said, since he didn't see the accident, he really doesn't know what happened.

Not if it is done correctly. It was welded on to begin with so why should a new one be any worse if done correctly and a good body shop is more than capable of performing this operation. As for the paint, since the factory paint is for the most part shit anymore, I don't see how the body shop could do any worse.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hmmm.... vehicle #1 was progressing down a street, vehicle #2 was coming out of a driveway. #1 has side-impact damage, #2 has head-on damage. #2 tried to stop, as evidenced by skid marks. It's pretty obvious #1 didn't slide sideways from across the street into #2. It's also obvious #2 was travelling at a certain rate of speed to make those skid marks - clearly moving too quickly to safely turn 90 into traffic.
Those are all facts easily verifiable by looking at the scene. Now - is it possible that #1 was travelling in the left-lane, and changed into the right, striking #2 as he was pulling out into the right-hand lane? Possible (don't know if it was a multi-lane road, but say it was).... but still, why the skid marks from #2, indicating (as Nate stated) an initial speed of 30-35MPH when the brakes were applied?

So you won't mind if someone crashes into the side of your truck, then offers to pay a body shop to fix it, right? I mean - it'll be good as new, so it really shouldn't make a difference?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Funny how you questioned the speed in your initial post in this thread saying with the minimal damage that vehicle 2 could not be going all that fast and are not whining to me about vehicle 2 going to fast to make the turn. You really need to back off on the noise level and make up your mind.

Really??? Were you there? Did you see the scene?

Perhaps the skid marks were from another vehicle or perhaps vehicle 2's brakes were not functioning properly and only the rear wheels applied significant braking force. Skid marks from the rear wheels only will cause much longer skid marks and you did know that, right? And thinking of that, unless the driver was operating a Yugo or similarly sized vehicle, the skid marks for a vehicle traveling at 35 MPH would be of a significant length so where exactly did driver 2 apply these brakes. Then again, perhaps the officer was using the density of the skid marks to determine speed but that would be influenced by the weight of the vehicle and if he estimated it incorrectly.... Perhaps it was just the position of the sun blinding driver 2 and he couldn't see her and the officer decided not to make driver 2's day even worse than it already was since he was not driving carelessly. Like I said before, there are just too many variables.

LOL, please show me where in the above comment that you retained that I said that he shouldn't mind or that it shouldn't bother him?
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

ah yes. but one more thing that tom knows absolutely nothing about but will argue endlessly about asi f he were an expert. time to sit back and watch tom prove himself a fool once again.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ah, ya have a couple of tom's.
Roy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Once again - I'll explain it so you can understand. Initially, the way Nate described it, it sounded like the impact occurred at 30-35MPH. When he clarified, it became apparent that the speed of the vehicle was determined to be 30-35MPH based on the skid marks, meaning that the speed at impact was significantly slower (as evidenced by the amount of damage done).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ok i gotta ask....
so driving essentially blind folded is not careless???

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not if the conditions that are causing it are beyond your control.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving
>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

from what comic pages do you come up with this shit ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Total rubbish. The control factor is to stop the vehicle or pull over if you cannot see. It is well within the control of any person operating a vehicle to make a decision regarding if they can see or not. This is one more example of T-bone thinking that responsibility for ones own actions isn't necessary.
--
Max

Give a man a match, and he is warm for a short while. Light him on fire, and
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, on your part.

Then I guess that all traffic going or required to look east must stop for the first hour or so after sunrise and and all traffic going or needing to look west must stop for the last hour prior to sunset on clear days as this visibility problem exists for all of them, LOL.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.